search_library

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (name, category, description, tags, and parameter specs), which is helpful. However, it does not mention any side effects, safety considerations, or read-only hints. As a search operation, safety is implied, but the description could be more explicit.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences: the first states the action, the second explains the parameter and return format. It is front-loaded, efficient, and contains no unnecessary words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: the matching behavior, empty query handling, and the content of the response. It is complete and well-suited for an AI agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema description coverage is 0%, but the description fully explains the parameter 'query': keywords matched against fields, with empty returning all. This adds significant value beyond the schema (only type and default), providing clear meaning and usage guidance for the single parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Search the part library.' It specifies that the query matches against name, description, tags, and category, and that an empty query returns all results. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform other actions like inspection or measurement.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context for when to use the tool: to search the library. It mentions that an empty query returns all results, implying a simple usage pattern. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives, but the sibling tools list makes it clear this is the primary search tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.